Fat2Fit and built-in TDEE deficit question

Options
Mom2M_and_O
Mom2M_and_O Posts: 214
in Health and Weight Loss
Hi -- I've read several threads recently advocating the use of the Fat2Fit BMR tool to get suggested calories to attain your goal weight. And listening to the audio clips on that site makes so much sense. But some who recommend it have said there is a built-in deficit -- I saw stated that it is a 20% deficit from actual TDEE. They also stated that it takes into account BF%.

HOWEVER....

When I was crunching numbers on it this week, I was seeing no 20% deficit and no matter what BF% I entered, the numbers always came out the same. For each activity level they seemed to multiply to goal weight Harris-Benedict BMR x activity multiplier.

So, I can understand that if you are far from your goal weight, then the maintenance numbers of that weight are inherently different enough from the maintenance of a much higher weight so that loss will naturally occur. But aside from that, I don't see those numbers as being 20% less than TDEE. And I don't see BF% playing into it.

FWIW, I'm plugging in the following parameters:
35yo, female, 5'3", cw 151, gw 137, bf%32 (and falling)

I'm just trying to get a good handle on how these calculators work so I know which caloric numbers to adjust to given my activity level and goal. The idea of a built-in deficit in the F2F one sounded great -- just eat that and move along -- but it just doesn't seem to be adding up to me -- maybe it's because I'm so close to my goal weight. And the various TDEE calcs all seem to come up with different numbers. <sigh>

Thanks.

Replies

  • willis84
    willis84 Posts: 86 Member
    Options
    Untying to figure this out as well. F2f is suggesting I eat 2124 calories a day and mfp is says eat 1200. That's a great difference and I'm unsure who to turn to
  • chrisb75
    chrisb75 Posts: 395 Member
    Options
    Fat2fit is saying that you eat your goal weight TDEE. That is a built in deficit from your current weight's TDEE. As you get closer to your goal weight your weight loss will slow. This is normal. Please join the group Eat more Weigh less.
  • Mom2M_and_O
    Mom2M_and_O Posts: 214
    Options
    Thank you for the clarification, Chrisb75.
    Untying to figure this out as well. F2f is suggesting I eat 2124 calories a day and mfp is says eat 1200. That's a great difference and I'm unsure who to turn to

    I think the F2F philosophy makes total sense. I'm definitely not afraid to eat more, and if I had it to do over again, I would start off with that method because it's way better to eat and lose the healthy way than not eat and lose in an unhealthy way. Had I done that from the beginning I don't think I would have had the frustrations I've had for the last couple of months, not understanding why I plateaued. I understand now.

    Having bought into the mindset now, I was confused because of some misstatements that were made on threads regarding the math involved with the F2F numbers. It had been stated several times that it already includes a 20% deficit (and takes into account BF%), but really it only includes a deficit RELATIVE to your current weight TDEE. You can see that if you plug in your current weight as the goal weight (pretending you are going to maintain where you are instead of lose) and compare it to the numbers generated for your real goal weight. For some people far away from their goal weight, that may be 20%. For me, it's far less since I'm within range of my goal -- just a 60-calorie difference between maintaining at 151 vs 137.

    So, I guess that's where the statement on the F2F page comes into play -- as you get nearer your goal, you can decrease caloric intake by 200-300 cals/day to speed up the loss as long as you at least net your BMR everyday, which may be what I need to do. A 60-calorie deficit will get me the rest of the way, but it will take 2 years to do it. :laugh: I'm in no hurry, but it would be nice to get there a wee bit sooner than that.

Categories